WASHINGTON (AP) -- The District of Columbia is becoming the first U.S. jurisdiction to allow Internet gambling, trying to raise millions of dollars from the habits of online poker buffs and acting ahead of traditional gambling meccas like New Jersey and Nevada.

The elites in congress and the rest of DC get to legally play online poker now, but they still have the gall to try to prevent the rest of us from doing what we wish with our own money in the privacy of our homes?

The elites in congress and the rest of DC get to legally play online poker now, but they still have the gall to try to prevent the rest of us from doing what we wish with our own money in the privacy of our homes?

More likely some politicians kids got caught playing illegal poker so they legalise it meaning their kid wont go to jail.

The elites in congress and the rest of DC get to legally play online poker now, but they still have the gall to try to prevent the rest of us from doing what we wish with our own money in the privacy of our homes?

More likely some politicians kids got caught playing illegal poker so they legalise it meaning their kid wont go to jail.

or something....

It was never illegal in most states anyways, and definitely not at the federal level; however, the DOJ treats it as if it's illegal although they have never gone after individual players and do not consider individual players to be breaking the law.

This specific DC ruling came about because of some clause in some budget item that if they didn't renew something or take action on something, online poker would become legal. I don't remember the specifics at the moment, but I'm sure it's in every article discussing the new legal status.

Speaking of which, here's a congressman's son playing poker and making an ass out of himself:

From what I understood, online gambling was not illegal in any state, but it was illegal to use credit cards to cash out your winnings. This restriction was slipped into, where else, the "Safe Harbor Act of 2006."

If DC allows this I wonder how they expect people to cash out their winnings.

Do not waste your time debating whether Bitcoin can work. It does work.

"Early adopters will profit" is not a sufficient condition to classify something as a pyramid or Ponzi scheme. If it was, Apple and Microsoft stock are Ponzi schemes.

There is no such thing as "market manipulation." There is only buying and selling.

From what I understood, online gambling was not illegal in any state, but it was illegal to use credit cards to cash out your winnings. This restriction was slipped into, where else, the "Safe Harbor Act of 2006."

If DC allows this I wonder how they expect people to cash out their winnings.

Almost.

The UIGEA, slipped into that safe harbor act, made it illegal for BANKS to allow DEPOSITS to online gambling websites that were ALREADY ILLEGAL. It also expressely ALLOWED WITHDRAWALS from online gambling sites in any form. As online poker wasn't illegal, it should not have been affected, and withdrawals definitely should not have been affected.

However, withdrawals and online poker sites were easy targets to pick on because no one who handled the money was going to be dumb enough to show up in a US Federal court (Is it >95% conviction rate there?); so the DOJ started seizing player withdrawals.